bostonfred
Footballguy
I understand what you said. The inconsistency is in refusing to acknowledge the past accomplishments of this 2005 Patriots team, then bringing up the Broncos' record in games after the bye.Not at all inconsistant. I said if the 2004 Patriots showed up, they'd be favored. Unfortunately, the 2004 Patriots don't exist anymore. Now there's just the 2005 Patriots, which aren't anywhere NEAR as good as the 2004 version. As a result, the 2005 Patriots will be underdogs to Denver- as they should be, since Denver is a much better team than the 2005 Patriots, even if they're potentially worse than the 2004 Patriots.Well, I'll tell you what, if the 2004 New England Patriots show up to play the Denver Broncos, they'll probably be favored.You want to know what ELSE the Patriots haven't done in the past 4 years? For one, they haven't sent a team to the playoffs that was worse than 6th in the NFL in points allowed. This season, they're 18th. They were also a combined 5-0 against Indy and Denver in 2003-2004, and a combined 0-2 against Indy and Denver in 2005.Inconsistent.the fact ALSO remains that no team has a better record in weeks following the bye, since the bye was introduced, than the Denver Broncos.
The Broncos haven't had a bye week since the Elway/Terrell Davis Superbowl teams. How can you possibly cite their record in games after the bye week from 1998, when you won't acknowledge the Patriots' playoff record from 2001-2004?
Inconsistent.